CRM-M-15673 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 102 Rahul Sangar State of Punjab and Coram : Present: Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) 1. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No. 10.10.2024, registered under Sections BNS, 2023, at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. 2. for anticipatory bail. of the same relief, however, the same was declined to him vide order dated 17.12.2024. 3. dismissal of the first petition bearing CRM entered into a compromise and, thus, the present second petition is maintainable in view of the changed circumstances. He submits that though the injury attributed to the petitioner has been declared as grievous, but in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. 4. behalf of respondent no.2 between the parties. 15673-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Rahul Sangar Versus Punjab and another Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No. , registered under Sections 115(2), 118, 351(2), 191(3) & 190 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. This is the second bail application filed by the petitioner praying for anticipatory bail. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court for grant of the same relief, however, the same was declined to him vide order dated Learned counsel for the petitioner dismissal of the first petition bearing CRM entered into a compromise and, thus, the present second petition is maintainable in view of the changed circumstances. He submits that though tributed to the petitioner has been declared as grievous, but in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. At this stage, Mr. H.S. Sandhu, Advocate, puts in appearance o behalf of respondent no.2-complainant and concedes the factum of compromise between the parties. - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-15673-2025 Decided on:08.04.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj petition, filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case FIR No.134 dated 115(2), 118, 351(2), 191(3) & 190 of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. application filed by the petitioner praying Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court for grant of the same relief, however, the same was declined to him vide order dated Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that after dismissal of the first petition bearing CRM-M-63549-2024, the parties have entered into a compromise and, thus, the present second petition is maintainable in view of the changed circumstances. He submits that though tributed to the petitioner has been declared as grievous, but in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, the petitioner At this stage, Mr. H.S. Sandhu, Advocate, puts in appearance o complainant and concedes the factum of compromise ...Petitioner ...Respondents 2023, dated 115(2), 118, 351(2), 191(3) & 190 of the application filed by the petitioner praying Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court for grant of the same relief, however, the same was declined to him vide order dated has contended that after 2024, the parties have entered into a compromise and, thus, the present second petition is maintainable in view of the changed circumstances. He submits that though tributed to the petitioner has been declared as grievous, but in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, the petitioner At this stage, Mr. H.S. Sandhu, Advocate, puts in appearance on complainant and concedes the factum of compromise VINOD KUMAR 2025.04.25 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-15673 5. available record, it is deciphered that armed with a `Dha’, a sharp edged weapon, and allegedly given blows thereof on the head and right arm near elbow of injured Pal Singh alleged to have given injuries to the cousin of the complainant, namely, Lovepreet Singh on his right hand injuries to complainant Akashdeep Singh suffered seven injuries and injuries and out of them, allegedly attributed to the petitioner, nature. The petitioner is also facing prosecution in two more cases bearing FIR No.149/2023, registered under Sections 379 District Fatehgarh Sa 365, 323, 341 of IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Amloh, Fatehgarh Sahib, which the petitioner has now entered into a compromise not make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6. are given under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under: 15673-2025 After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the available record, it is deciphered that the petitioner had been alleged to be a `Dha’, a sharp edged weapon, and allegedly given blows thereof on the head and right arm near elbow of injured Pal Singh alleged to have given injuries to the cousin of the complainant, namely, Lovepreet Singh on his right hand. Besides t injuries to complainant Akashdeep Singh. As per the MLR suffered seven injuries and complainant Akashdeep Singh had suffered five injuries and out of them, injury no.2 suffered by Akashdeep Singh, which is allegedly attributed to the petitioner, had been declared to be grievous in nature. The petitioner is also facing prosecution in two more cases bearing FIR No.149/2023, registered under Sections 379- District Fatehgarh Sahib and FIR No.31/2024, registered under Sections 395, 365, 323, 341 of IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Amloh, Fatehgarh Sahib, which depicts his criminal antecedents. the petitioner has now entered into a compromise not make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters are given under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under: “482. Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest: 1. When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. 2. When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including - 2 - After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the the petitioner had been alleged to be a `Dha’, a sharp edged weapon, and allegedly given blows thereof on the head and right arm near elbow of injured Pal Singh and he is also alleged to have given injuries to the cousin of the complainant, namely, . Besides this, he has also allegedly given . As per the MLRs, Pal Singh had complainant Akashdeep Singh had suffered five suffered by Akashdeep Singh, which is had been declared to be grievous in nature. The petitioner is also facing prosecution in two more cases bearing FIR -B of IPC, at Police Station Amloh, hib and FIR No.31/2024, registered under Sections 395, 365, 323, 341 of IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Amloh, his criminal antecedents. The mere fact that the petitioner has now entered into a compromise with the complainant does not make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters are given under Section 482 (1) & (2) of BNSS which reads as under:- ection for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest: When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a nder this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the the petitioner had been alleged to be a `Dha’, a sharp edged weapon, and allegedly given blows thereof also alleged to have given injuries to the cousin of the complainant, namely, his, he has also allegedly given , Pal Singh had complainant Akashdeep Singh had suffered five suffered by Akashdeep Singh, which is had been declared to be grievous in nature. The petitioner is also facing prosecution in two more cases bearing FIR B of IPC, at Police Station Amloh, hib and FIR No.31/2024, registered under Sections 395, 365, 323, 341 of IPC and 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, at Police Station Amloh, The mere fact that with the complainant does For the consideration of anticipatory bail, the statutory parameters When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a nder this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it VINOD KUMAR 2025.04.25 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-15673 7. Sharma, (1997) 7 SCC 187 8. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632 and again reiterated that while conside 15673-2025 (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) a condition that the person shall indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) a condition that the person shall not l the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.” Hon'ble Supreme Court in State represented by (1997) 7 SCC 187 has held as under: “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconded with a favorable order 438 if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Succession such interrogation would elude knows that he is well protected and insulted by a pre the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632 and again reiterated that while considering the anticipatory bail the Court is to - 3 - a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; such other condition as may be imposed under sub section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted Hon'ble Supreme Court in State represented by CBI Vs. Anil has held as under:- “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconded with a favorable order under Section if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Succession such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulted by a pre-arrest bail during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632, has time ring the anticipatory bail the Court is to a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to eave India without such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of section 480, as if the bail were granted CBI Vs. Anil “6. We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation oriented than questioning Section if the code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. if the suspected person arrest bail during the time he interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves in task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judicial precedents including , has time ring the anticipatory bail the Court is to VINOD KUMAR 2025.04.25 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-15673 take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. The Court should be circumspect about the impact of it as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. 9. apparent that the complicity o The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would scuttle the ongoing investigation. 10. Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour compromise having been arrived at by him with the complainant, especially when he has crimi devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. 11. on the merits of the case. April 08, 2025 vinod* 15673-2025 take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. The Court should be circumspect about the impact of it as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is apparent that the complicity of the petitioner has been The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would scuttle the ongoing investigation. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour compromise having been arrived at by him with the complainant, especially when he has criminal antecedents. Resultantly, the present petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. , 2025 Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Whether Reportable: - 4 - take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. The Court should be circumspect about the impact of its decision on the society as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be exercised in the extraordinary circumstances. Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is f the petitioner has been prima facie established. The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would scuttle the ongoing investigation. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the extraordinary power by this Court in their favour merely on account of a compromise having been arrived at by him with the complainant, especially Resultantly, the present petition, being Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion (Rajesh Bhardwaj) Judge Whether Speaking/Reasoned: NO/YES NO/YES take into consideration the factors like gravity of offence, chances of accused tampering with the evidence and probabilities of his fleeing from justice etc. s decision on the society as well. The anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretion which should be Weighing the facts of the case on the anvil of the law settled, it is established. The investigation is at its threshold. Thus, granting anticipatory bail to the case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner does not qualify for exercising the merely on account of a compromise having been arrived at by him with the complainant, especially Resultantly, the present petition, being Nothing said herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion VINOD KUMAR 2025.04.25 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document